Attorneys to get financial help
Next week, the board of the Texas Access to Justice Foundation will sit down and decide how to divvy out $53,000 to attorneys who assisted with the FLDS case.
Back in April, some 400 lawyers from around Texas stepped up to represent the 439 children and their mothers after the state raided the Yearning For Zion Ranch in Eldorado, home to members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
Most did it knowing they were likely offering assistance on a pro bono basis, for free.
''The lawyers who have gone out there are going out there with the understanding they may never be paid a dime for it,'' said Tom Vick in April. Vick is a family practice attorney and member of the Access to Justice Foundation. He helped recruit the lawyers.
The other big unknown at the time: what kind of assistance they might be asked to provide? And, for how long?
Surely, none imagined their involvement would require such frequent trips to San Angelo or travel throughout the state to visit children placed in foster care. But that is how it turned out and many of the volunteer attorneys took quite a financial hit.
''It went way beyond what anybody's expectation was,'' Vick told me the other day.
Since June, when the children were returned to their parents, a few attorneys have put pleas in court filings that asked Judge Barbara Walther to order parents or the county to pay their fees. That's allowed under Texas family law. The expectation is that the expenses will go to the county.
Sheryl Johnson-Todd of Hanson, Texas, had filed such a motion but agreed to not seek payment from the parents when the state dismissed the cases involving the children she represented.
''We have all had a lot of expenditures, both in terms of time and travel expenses visiting the children,'' she said.
Frank Douthitt, a solo practitioner in Henrietta, Texas, also put in a request for payment in a recent court pleading as an ''ancillary matter'' with no real expectation of receiving funds.
''If she doesn't pay me I won't be mad,'' Douthitt said of Walther. ''In this case, I, along with some 400 other lawyers, volunteered to help knowing we might never get paid. I was damn proud of the lawyers in Texas that stepped up in this case.''
Both are the type of attorneys the Texas Access to Justice Foundation may be able to help out.
Betty Balli Torres, executive director, said the foundation raised $53,000 in private donations and grants to help reimburse certain costs such as fuel expenditures, copying costs, hotel and meal expenses.
The foundation specifically wants to help attorneys who were not buffered by association with a firm and who had to put aside paying clients to assist in the FLDS case.
Just a fraction of the attorneys involved in the case, 43, representing a total of 97 children, put in requests for help totalling $43,600, Torres said.
''These are solo practitioners for the most part,'' Torres said. ''I am not sure we will pay them all but we have enough to do it.''
And that may be a big help to Schleicher County.
Schleicher County received a $68,000 grant from the state last spring to help cover expenses for meals, equipment and personnel during the raid at the ranch. The state also approved an as-needed grant of up to $58,000 to cover other expenses, such as an extra court clerk, a computer upgrade and travel to San Angelo.
Neither of those grants can be used for attorneys fees, however.
Schleicher County Treasurer Karen Henderson said Tuesday she has not received any bills for attorneys fees but expects to get a slew of them.
So far, Walther has approved payments for the two people who acted as administrators for the attorneys: Randol Stout and Carmen Dusek. Henderson said she had not yet received a bill from them.
But Henderson expects other attorneys bills to pour in and ''it's going to be pretty sizable.
''We are working on trying to get money from the state to pay those attorneys' fees,'' she said. ''That is still in the works.''
Back in April, some 400 lawyers from around Texas stepped up to represent the 439 children and their mothers after the state raided the Yearning For Zion Ranch in Eldorado, home to members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
Most did it knowing they were likely offering assistance on a pro bono basis, for free.
''The lawyers who have gone out there are going out there with the understanding they may never be paid a dime for it,'' said Tom Vick in April. Vick is a family practice attorney and member of the Access to Justice Foundation. He helped recruit the lawyers.
The other big unknown at the time: what kind of assistance they might be asked to provide? And, for how long?
Surely, none imagined their involvement would require such frequent trips to San Angelo or travel throughout the state to visit children placed in foster care. But that is how it turned out and many of the volunteer attorneys took quite a financial hit.
''It went way beyond what anybody's expectation was,'' Vick told me the other day.
Since June, when the children were returned to their parents, a few attorneys have put pleas in court filings that asked Judge Barbara Walther to order parents or the county to pay their fees. That's allowed under Texas family law. The expectation is that the expenses will go to the county.
Sheryl Johnson-Todd of Hanson, Texas, had filed such a motion but agreed to not seek payment from the parents when the state dismissed the cases involving the children she represented.
''We have all had a lot of expenditures, both in terms of time and travel expenses visiting the children,'' she said.
Frank Douthitt, a solo practitioner in Henrietta, Texas, also put in a request for payment in a recent court pleading as an ''ancillary matter'' with no real expectation of receiving funds.
''If she doesn't pay me I won't be mad,'' Douthitt said of Walther. ''In this case, I, along with some 400 other lawyers, volunteered to help knowing we might never get paid. I was damn proud of the lawyers in Texas that stepped up in this case.''
Both are the type of attorneys the Texas Access to Justice Foundation may be able to help out.
Betty Balli Torres, executive director, said the foundation raised $53,000 in private donations and grants to help reimburse certain costs such as fuel expenditures, copying costs, hotel and meal expenses.
The foundation specifically wants to help attorneys who were not buffered by association with a firm and who had to put aside paying clients to assist in the FLDS case.
Just a fraction of the attorneys involved in the case, 43, representing a total of 97 children, put in requests for help totalling $43,600, Torres said.
''These are solo practitioners for the most part,'' Torres said. ''I am not sure we will pay them all but we have enough to do it.''
And that may be a big help to Schleicher County.
Schleicher County received a $68,000 grant from the state last spring to help cover expenses for meals, equipment and personnel during the raid at the ranch. The state also approved an as-needed grant of up to $58,000 to cover other expenses, such as an extra court clerk, a computer upgrade and travel to San Angelo.
Neither of those grants can be used for attorneys fees, however.
Schleicher County Treasurer Karen Henderson said Tuesday she has not received any bills for attorneys fees but expects to get a slew of them.
So far, Walther has approved payments for the two people who acted as administrators for the attorneys: Randol Stout and Carmen Dusek. Henderson said she had not yet received a bill from them.
But Henderson expects other attorneys bills to pour in and ''it's going to be pretty sizable.
''We are working on trying to get money from the state to pay those attorneys' fees,'' she said. ''That is still in the works.''
154 Comments:
Bah! That doesn't even cover the cost of gas, much less other costs.
IM very proud of Texas Attorneys who gave of themselves and their time, whether paid or pro bono.
Whether I agreed with them or not. They saw a need and made every effort to meet that need.
Texas is a good place, with lots of Good people who are always giving of their time, themselves and their expertise, alot of it is free.
I take back half the lawyer jokes I've told.
The other half stays with the ones that kept this travesty going.
"...The expectation is that the expenses will go to the county."
But it was NOT Judge Johnny's party, just ask him!
****
"So far, Walther has approved payments for the two people who acted as administrators for the attorneys: Randol Stout and Carmen Dusek."
A couple of outstanding professionals. Who else stepped forward and demanded that the state take away all those cell phones, some cam phones. I bet walther wants to pay them double flp they gave to prevent obstruction of justice! They didn't need to talk to their attorneys, they still had the final hearing.
That should read:
"...pay them double FOR ALL THE PROFESSIONAL HELP they gave to prevent obstruction of justice!"
Cordless key board batteries evidently low again.
ALL the attorneys should put in bills so that the entire cost of this fiasco can be calculated. It would be good to see how an agency running amuck, a biased judge, a law enforcement that does not follow the law, and a town that demonstrates hatred toward a religion have truly cost the State of Texas...and yes, since the prejudice and hatred starts at the top, Texas should pay the attorneys. If they didn't persecute the FLDS NONE of these costs would be incurred.
Go Attorneys!
Anyone know if Malonis has her hand out or has her free publicity and Nancy Grace appearances been enough payment?
Malonis is no longer at the father / son law firm of Elsey and Elsey.
She's now working at what looks to be a one-man office.
So I'd guess that "her free publicity and Nancy Grace appearances" was not enough to make her boss happy.
I have little doubt she could explain it all using "what if's" to make it look like she's advancing in her career!
kbp assumes on absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Malonis was asked to leave her former law office.
The removal of cell phones was not an attempt to separate the women from THEIR lawyers, it was an attempt to separate the women from the lawyers of the priesthood.
Maybe I am incorrect in my "guess" there Betty.
Maybe the one-man office of Reib Law was so AMAZED by "her free publicity and Nancy Grace appearances" that he out bid the father / son office of Elsey and Elsey to get her into his office.
...or maybe not, as one would anticipate that if she was such a hot commodity in the legal world, she'd have told of having PARTNERED with him instead of simply "associated".
Why don't you write natalie @ reiblaw dot com and clear it all up so nobody will have to "assume" any more!
On the cell phone matter, you miss a few points there. The order came immediately AFTER pictures were made public and the women have the right to talk to an attorney that represents them as members of their church.
Read the ORDER. That "prevent" was just another Texas Pre-Crime move that is BS, resembling what the higher courts ruled was NOT legal.
"pre-crime move"
We're living in the world of the Minority Report, without the "precogs." Well, maybe Malonis is a precog...
Kdp,
Weird cause Natalie Malonis is still an attorney at Elsey/Elsey I just looked, her name is there in right along with the father and son.
Maybe you should go look?
Kdp, Why dont you write Reib law firm if you are so interested, lol
Kdp
Go back and reread the ORDER, it wasnt cps or Judge Walther who was concerned about tampering with witnesses through cells phone communications, it was Ad Litems that requested the order.
the original order is a mute point by now - its six months later. in my opinion, it would be nice of the state of texas to reimburse those attorneys that went above and beyond what they thought they were going to do when they volunteered to be ad litem in this case. it was cps and the state that decide to split up family units all across the state of texas and make it harder on everyone involved. like song of joy stated lets know they real cost of this raid by adding up the ALL of state's costs with the ad litems personal costs. its got to be over 20 million which could have gone to much better use in the whole state of texas.
Rain
Texas decided the abuse happening in YFZ ranch was worth the cost. As do many Texans.
Attorneys knew goin in there would be costs, they had an opportunity to step away anytime they wanted.
Lots of the attorneys who volunteered werent even family law attorneys. They had to take a short course before they could volunteer.
I see that the state is using testimony obtained from the mothers and children, before they were able to, or offered, legal counsel. All that testimony can and should be quashed.
marrie...the *alleged* abuse.
Marrie,
Natalie is the one that announced her change of employment. I doubt Elsey and Elsey has updated their web site.
On the Order, it was those assigned to oversee the Ad Litems by the STATE OF TEXAS. If they were ONLY acting as Ad Litems, their concerns would ONLY be for those they had as clients.
They obtained an Order that applied to all 465+/- children that were improperly held in custody. They did not represent all the children or "all adults within the shelter" in which all the "electronic communication devices, including but not limited to cellular telephones, PDAs and smartphones" were removed from.
It was one of many moves "EX PARTE" that the in-crowd saw in walther's court, while she continues to this day to ignore motions filed by attorneys NOT within that group.
*****
Ztgstmv,
The State of Texas, by way of the DFPS web site, announced the court had "CONCLUDED" the abuse by April 7th. BEFORE any court held a hearing. The Pre-Crime Department had Pre-Concluded the outcome!.
z-you're doing an apples and oranges thing, here...
you're applying standards used in criminal investigations to a child protective case....
totally different...same rights don't apply...like questioning children without parents present...
or informing parents of a right to counsel before questioning...
these things are just not required in child protective cases....
wouldn't it be nice if, in order for an atty to be compensated, the parent or child represented had to stipulate that the atty represented their wishes.....
Wouldnt it be nice if People paid attorneys instead of getting services FREE!
Flds seems to be able to pay for all the suits of UEP and Parker law firm, but they cant afford to pay for attorneys for their children?
All adults had the right to counsel.
The next question will be what authority the CPS used in questioning the children. Which brings us back to the truthfulness of that "saving Sarah" approach.
Excuse me reric, but the Constitution always applies, civil or criminal. If CPS workers interrogate parents or children (who may be adults for all they know), without informing them that what they say can be used against them in a court of law, then the testimony they obtain, CANNOT be used in a court of law.
"Flds seems to be able to pay for all the suits of UEP and Parker law firm, but they cant afford to pay for attorneys for their children?"
If the state had limited their actions to only those that they could legally take custody of, there would be ZERO attorneys needed.
I got a giggle out of your approach though. If any church member in the USA wishes to utilize their constitutional right to an attorney, but cannot personally afford one, their church should pay for it!!
Z,
I am not sure about the child in that case. It seems like another of those 'exceptions to your rights' we read of so often today!
Kdp
Since when is Flds a church? They are a registered LLC, not a church.
Were their "church" doors open to anyone who wanted to come? OH I forgot they never had a church. YFZ has a temple, but its behind locked gates. hmmmmm, so how many converts did they have in this so called church? NONE!
None of the women and children were under arrest, they were moved from the ranch so they could interview them. It was for sure, they couldnt do it at the ranch.
Church
a building for public Christian worship.
public worship of God or a religious service in such a building: to attend church regularly.
If the CPS gave the parents the impression that they had no choice but to comply with the interrogation of themselves and their children, then that testimony was coerced and therefore illegal, particularly if the CPS agent had no probable cause to believe those particular children were at immediate risk of abuse. See the Gates case ruling for an explanation of when it's illegal to pull children aside and interrogate them.
I wish the lawyers would start to pick apart the events of the ranch raid, and determine exactly what questioning was illegal and what wasn't. That would clear things up.
As it stands, the majority of the state's case is based on testimony and materials from the ranch raid, which from what I can tell was obtained without particularized probable cause.
ztg
The case is now criminal investigation. Remember, it wasnt Just CPS, the FBI had a warrant also.
CPS can interview children they suspect of abuse in any form. The mothers of the children were there.
kbp-
I'm not sure if parents have the "right" to counsel in the initial investigation...when CPS first came to the ranch...
I think the right to counsel kicks in when they make the decision to take emergency custody...and in this case, it fell outside the typical emergency custody determination because they had a court order....
I don't know all the nuances of Texas, but I do know that rights, etc. are not the same and do not kick in at the same time.....
z-again, apples and oranges...we're not talking criminal court, here...well, at least not at the earliest juncture where the children were taken into custody...
A child can be removed, there can even be a founded case of abuse or neglect without any criminal charges ever being brought.....
So theoretically, what a parent says can be used to prove neglect, or abuse, but it isn't "against" the parent, it is in the interest of the child...
"CPS can interview children they suspect of abuse in any form. "
-----------------
That's not what the Gates ruling says. CPS workers need to be able to articulate probable cause of abuse specific to the children of that family. The ranch is not one family. They never articulated probable cause for the vast majority if not all of those children when they entered the ranch. They just went in and demanded the children be brought out. That is illegal. That is not how a government should operate.
So are you saying, reric, that a CPS worker can go up to any parent in any house and interrogate them, and then turn over the notes from that interview to LE, so that LE can use it in a criminal case?
IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING??? Sounds pretty unethical to me. Sounds like a loophole in the justice system, to get around the necessity of reading a person his rights whenever an interview takes place, in which the words spoken can later be used against the interviewee.
reric, you say losing a child isn't an act against the parent. I suppose you think that the loss of child basically isn't punishment. The parent should feel nothing. The state is indifferent, so the parent should be likewise indifferent to the loss of their children. They shouldn't take it personally, or feel like their being punished, or feel like the state is taking action against them.
I BEG TO DIFFER.
I think the taking of one's children fits the description of cruel and unusual punishment.
kpb,
You're the one fascinated with Malonis and making up stories, I could give a rip except to point out that you are being inventive.
Witness tampering. Lawyers were telling the women not to say who the father of the children were. That's been admitted even by the FLDS women themselves. There is one account on line that admits that. Not to give full names, not to answer questions about dates of birth, dates of marriage, etc. Now who, exactly, does THAT protect? Hint: it's neither the woman nor the child. If the lawyer tells you to lie and/or withhold basic information about who you are, it's witness tampering.
ziggy asked "So are you saying, reric, that a CPS worker can go up to any parent in any house and interrogate them, and then turn over the notes from that interview to LE, so that LE can use it in a criminal case?"
Pretty much. Whether it's a loophole for oppression or a necessary tool in taking care of children's rights is up to discussion.
ztg the new ruling just happened last month!
Yes, from this point on CPS will have to do things differently. But, it has NOTHING to do with this case they are investigating now.
The adult women with the children were there voluntarily to be with their children. Since they were not being charged with any crime or held against their will, I do not believe that they have rights to consul. Also, the advice they were getting was definitely not in their or their children's best interest. In fact, if the women had given factual information from the start the children may very well have not been removed from the ranch at all.
I'm all for civil disobedience as an instrument for change. But I'm sick of this business of breaking the law, hiding from prosecution and then blaming everyone else for religious persecution. If you chose to break the law for your religion, stand up and admit it and work for change. But, IMHO, the fundamentalist mormons want to do whatever the heck they want and answer to no one for it. I have no respect for that; it is a naive sort of anarcy.
Ztg, how do you pull crap out of the air! No one said a parent wouldnt be hurt or upset if a child was pulled out of the home!
But, What If a child was being physically abused by a member of the household? Would you prefer the parent keep the child they were abusing?
ztg said:
I BEG TO DIFFER.
I think the taking of one's children fits the description of cruel and unusual punishment.
********************
Well you can differ all you want, but if CPS goes in a home where there is abuse taking place, where children are being harmed physically or sexually, then Tough tooties!
No child should have to stay in a home where they are being abused.
z-
I was speaking from the perspective of the legal system. Not what my personal opinion is...
I agree with you, taking a child from his/her parents is a huge deal....and for most parents that experience it, it is the most painful thing in the world....
That is why it is supposed to be only in the case of imminent danger...and it is why all CPS agencies, across the country, are supposed to have plans for reunification for every child...unless, of course, the parents are true monsters...and there are a few of them that are.....
Marie,
Your arguments are just funny. You talk the Texas talk as if "allegations" and "indictments" are proof of a crime. Already the 2 higher courts of Texas have ruled that CPS overstepped the line. CPS is already convicted in this case, in other words. All those "allegations" against the FLDS are unfounded, and unproven.
Funny how nobody is denying that the raid was based on religion anymore. Every allegation of child abuse in this case includes the word FLDS. Child abuse is child abuse regardless of religion, but somehow people like you assume that the FLDS religion IS the abuse because they broke Texas LAW, that was changed to attack the FLDS.
ME
I dont know if the men indicted or guilty or not, no one does, till they go to court and all the evidence is shown.
However i dont believe GJ indict people frivolously.
YES the law was changed, way back in 2005, this is 2008, marriages were performed in 2006, with Jeffs knowing they were against the law.
IM for prosecution of anyone marrying illegally underage to be punished, matters not to me is they are religious or atheist.
betty, it protects the mothers. If the mother says her son's father is the same father to another woman's son, and CPS turns this information over to LE, which they did, that would incriminate the mothers.
The lawyers were rightly telling the mothers what they say could be used against them, because CPS weren't telling them that.
ME
How do you know all the allegations are false? I dont think anyone knows, we havent seen all the evidence.
The two higher courts didnt rule against investigations continuing Me. They ruled against taking the children under the prepubescent stage. The younger children.
They didnt rule against the Judge continuing the cases, thats what is the most important.
IF you have such proof that everything in evidence is false, please share with the rest of us?
ztg
As far as im aware, the mothers werent the ones being interviewed. it was the children.
The mothers were given attorneys for the children and themselves after the Judge ruled they would all be kept in custody at the 14 day hearing
marrie...
it takes next to nothing to get an indictment from a grand jury....it's not that they act frivously, it's that they don't require a level of proof...just reasonable belief that the crime has been commited...or whatever Texas' language is...
but the threshold for bringing in an indictment is vey, very low....
Marie,
Texas law: First lets say they're married, so we can get them for bigamy, then we'll say they're not "legally" married so we can get them for child abuse.
Are they married or not married? Sounds like Texas has a problem.
CPS took and interrogated children where there was no probable cause to justify that. Other than of course, they are FLDS -- which doesn't meet the standard of probable cause at all.
The men indicted, were indicted on more than one wife, legal, celestial whichever you prefer. Five of those men have underage wives, oops, 6 including warren jeffs. Three of those underage wives, have children.
Marrie,
Where is the proof Texas has of any abuse whatsoever other than they broke Texas LAW, which can also be disputed. There has to be a victim to be abuse right? Was this raid based on abusing "children" or for bigamy? If Texas had any evidence, it would be plastered all over MSM.
In America people are innocent until proven guilty right? Oh yeah, this is 2008, so that rule doesn't apply.
"Pretty much. Whether it's a loophole for oppression or a necessary tool in taking care of children's rights is up to discussion."
-------------
The Constitution applies to civil law as well as criminal. People need to be read their rights, and they are not to be compelled to answer questions unless they know their words can be used against them. End of discussion.
Ztg, if you read the interviews the first night, they were questioning children about 'SARAH'
asking them their names, how old they are, who their parents were.
Those werent bizarre questions to ask children.
Same thing the next day, they were asking questions about Sarah.
Turns out there were several sarah, just not a sarah who was 16 and had a baby and was pregnant.
)ME
First, by law in texas you cant have more than one wife, legally or otherwise. Secondly, being married under the age of 17 requires parental consent of court order.
Third, its legal to have sexual contact with any girl until the age of 17.
The only one I dont understand is the guy who is dutson, he could of legally gotten married with parental consent and filing for a marriage certificate. But he didnt do that, why not?
betty:
"In fact, if the women had given factual information from the start"
THEY DID, it was assumptions that drove the bigoted CPS crew, not the answers to questions. When they asked for names they gave names, when they asked for ages, they gave ages, when they asked for ID, they gave ID, just because they didn't LIKE the answers, doesn not mean they were not true. Just because CPS "thought" they were lying, only incriminates those who WERE LYING, and that is OBVIOUSLY CPS minion Voss.
"I'm all for civil disobedience as an instrument for change. But I'm sick of this business of breaking the law, hiding from prosecution and then blaming everyone else for religious persecution."
Excuse me, but when your freedom is removed BY LAW then what are you talking about? You think the FLDS should TRY to go to jail? That is rediculous. The religious practice is older than Kansas, the laws were created to stop the religion, the religion went in the underground, the persecution is nothing different than Forcing conformity to Unconstitional Laws. The LAW is wrong, not the religion.
its NOT legal to have sexual contact with a girl under the age of 17
Marrie,
you can have your socialist world, but the rest of us want to live in the land of the free, where people have rights. You reap what you sow. What you are willing for others to suffer will come back upon you to the uttermost. What goes around comes around. What you send out will return to you.
Back on the topic, I hope Texas has fun paying all those lawyers on top of the other $30 million (and growing) fiasco. I guess its really the taxpayers that are paying for this mess of religious persecution. Even if Texas won their case based on prejudice and hearsay, America won't be any better off, and perhaps a lot worse off, since the constitution will be a thing of naught.
Pliggy we all have the same freedoms, and we all have to abide by the laws.
The law is to protect not only us as adults, but children.
The law in Texas consider anyone under the age of 17 a minor.
Not one of these men who married underage girls could of legally gotten a marriage license because they already were married, except ONE, Keith Dutson jr. whose father by the way Keith Dutson sr is also married to a 17 yr old, but has other wives.
marrie, they weren't just asking about sarah. They were asking peripheral questions, such as "what age do you think it's right to get married; would you marry a 50 year old" etc. -- leading questions at 3AM.
At any rate, they had no probable cause to get those girls out of bed in the first place. Those were separate homes they took those children from, and there was no more reason to believe that "Sarah" was in any of those homes, than there is to believe Osama Bin Ladin is somewhere in your neighborhood.
z: So are you saying, reric, that a CPS worker can go up to any parent in any house and interrogate them, and then turn over the notes from that interview to LE, so that LE can use it in a criminal case?
--
It's a well-known fact that CPS was & is serving as a funnel to the AG's office in this case.
The whole raid was based on the criminal case, not child abuse as many supposed when it first started. CPS is being used as a tool for the AG to enter without a valid search warrant, question children without their lawyers present, and hold them hostage as ransom for the women to admit they are victims. The DNA was ordered for the sole purpose of the criminal lawsuit, not to establish children/parental relationships that CPS continually lied about.
CPS has not even questioned the mothers about child abuse, or even checked on the children since they have been returned to the parents. All their questions are about the criminal case, which is why Barbara (mother of Marianne) held to her 5th amendment rights.
There is one thing missing in all this that Texas is desperately searching for, a VICTIM.
betty said:
The adult women with the children were there voluntarily to be with their children. Since they were not being charged with any crime or held against their will, I do not believe that they have rights to consul.
Since they were there voluntarily, not charged or being held in custody... I can't figure out how LE or anyone else could take their personal property-phones. Can you explain?
Do's and Don'ts if you're investigated
1. Do not talk to anyone.
2. Do not take a lie detector test.
3. Do not answer any questions.
4. Do not make CPS mad.
5. If CPS or the police take the child, or you are charged with any crime against a child, you need to retain a competent lawyer.
6. Do ask what you're being investigated for.
7. Tape record all conversations with CPS case workers and the police. If you do not have a tape recorder, make sure that you have a reliable witness at all meetings, interviews, and telephone conversations.
8. If you have a private doctor or psychologist, have them examine the child if you are ordered to have the child examined by a doctor not of your choosing.
9. After all meetings, interviews, and telephone calls, write a certified letter (keep a copy) to the person with whom you spoke. List the main points discussed and end the letter,
10. TAFA strongly recommends that if you did nothing wrong, DO NOT plea bargain (including no-fault). Many times, on the surface, these plea bargains seem like the easy way out, but are really only the beginning of a nightmare for you and your family.
11. Know your rights. This is very important, if you expect to win. Learn as much as possible about the laws in your state and the requirements CPS must fulfill to recieve their funding (for example, avoid placement of children in foster care and reunite the family as quickly as possible).
12. Join TAFA.There is strength in numbers, and the emotional support availible through joining with others who have similar experiences will prove invaluable. Write letters to your caseworker's supervisor, CPS director, county or state supervising agency--anyone who has responsibility to provide proper services. If you do not get a satisfactory response, contact your legislators and news service.
"1. Do not talk to anyone.
2. Do not take a lie detector test.
3. Do not answer any questions.
"
-----------
Wait a minute, wasn't someone just saying that *if only* the women had answered questions their children wouldn't have been taken?
Which is it? I guess damned if you do, damned if you don't. Sucks to be FLDS in Texas.
(not that the women didn't answer questions. They did. http://freetoseparate.blogspot.com/2008/08/flds-were-not-cooperative-hogwash.html )
The anti-"purport" to marry more than one wife law "protects" nothing but legalized bigotry. Nazi style control of religion, by law, is not JUSTICE It is UN-American. No we don't ALL have to abide by the same laws, because laws were not written to stop YOUR religion.
No, I am not saying CPS can arbitrarily go up to any parent and start asking all sorts of questions...what I am saying is, when they have a report to investigate, they can speak to the parents, other family members, teachers, coachs, friends, anyone who may be able to shed light, or offer information concerning the welfare and care of the child or children who have been purportedly abused or neglected.
The fact that in the inital raid they treated the entire ranch as one home, by extention then they could interview all the members of the home...
Of course we know it's all bull shit...and we are beginning to dig up enough 'circumstantial' documentation to fairly certainly establish that CPS and the Rangers also knew it was bullshit, BEFORE they went in...howere', until a court agrees with that supposition, all of the questioning, etc. is kosher...or according to hoyle if you don't keep kosher....
z- you keep wanting to superimpose what is moral and ethical over what is legal...and, unfortunately, in Texas, the twain shall never meet....
Hopefully, things will move through the lower courts and some of the issues can be brought before either a federal judge or a higher Texas court.....and don't forget, we have the suit filed in Utah which may be far ranging in it's impact...if it can be successfully used to test polygamy, it will make for some changes in all of the cases in Texas...or at least one would think...but Texas does seem to fly by the seat of it's levi's, all too often....
what we "know" in our gut...where the dots lead us...and what the law and lower courts allow....at least until someone with enough clout stops them, are two entirely unrelated things....
I love reading other people write all the things some of us were writing almost daily back in April and May and June....it is so nice to not be only one or two people....
If some of y'all stick around, I might actually feel like I can take a few days away from the keyboard!!!!!
txblogger took that information from a webpage about defending yourself from CPS. Not exactly impartial. >I< would not give that advice, from what I have heard about ordinary cases. Doing what it says on that webpage will get you in a lot of trouble. I can understand trying to document what happens, but refusing to even give your name or tell the age or parentage of the kids will without a doubt escalate the CPS case worker's suspicions.
I would not suggest that when you are pulled by a traffic cop that you refuse to show your driver's license, either. Unless you want to spend the night in jail.
ME
Freedom doesnt include breaking the law. Its not hard to follow the laws of the land.
Freedoms have a price! The first amendment doesnt protect lawbreakers, even religious ones.
Since my concern all along has been Children, I would expect, even children have rights to not be made to take part in illegal activities by adults who know better. Even Religious ones.
betty-
In the average case, you are absolutely right...one has to look for a balance between screwing ones self, and making nice to the CPS worker and convincing him/her that you're a good parent and your children are safe...
On the other hand, nothing about the Texas abuse/persection/illegal raid, etc. is typical.....
More and more it is becoming clear that it was a bull shit excuse to get inside that ranch and those homes and remove all sorts of things and have unfettered access to scared women, children, and fathers before anyone could stop them.....
It really was, and continues to be, the goal of Texas to drive the FLDS out of their state....
I don't think it would have made any difference, whatsoever, what questions were or were not asked or answered...the Rangers and CPS had predetermined the outcome...and if no one gave them what they wanted, they would lie...without batting an eyelash....
For those of us who have long term involvment with CPS, no one has ever seen such systemic abuse of power and damage to so many children and their families...and many of us have seen some pretty awful behavior from our national cadre of CPS types.....
betty,
Any parent is well within their rights to refuse CPS entry.
At the very least, it gives one time to speak to an attorney while CPS is off getting a search warrant. You can be nice when they return.
Risky? Yeh. Not doing so is more risky. You allow them into your home and they can walk out with your child if, for instance, they are 'green' and see a stack of dirty dishes in the kitchen sink. Or say, you bought your son a Mike's Hard Lemonade not knowing it was alcoholic. They held that kid for two days while they "investigated".
Yes, it's risky either way, but when word gets around and more parents start denying access without a warrant, it won't be as risky. It will be common and expected.
Given, that a kid is four times more likely to be killed or injured in their custody- when CPS walks out with a child a parent should require them to sign a soemthing stating that they take full responsibility for the well-being of the child while in their custody.
With those stats, I can't believe they're still allowed to be called "protective services", much less allowed to take kids into custody.
Marrie, over and over again you claim that your concern is for the children, yet you watched these NON-ABUSED children be torn from their mother's arms; you've (hopefully) read the letters by the mental health workers who saw the way CPS workers abused both mother and children, and if you haven't seen the video of Merrianne being forced back into captivity, you should.
If you've done those things, I honestly don't understand how you can claim that 'my concern is for the children.'
Ad litems and honest CPS workers were saying, IN COURT, that the parents were good parents and they did not suspect any abuse, and Walther STILL kept the children in custody.
What we need is ONE GOOD JUDGE and then maybe the innocent FLDS would have some justice and this religious persecution would end.
My concern, at this point, is that Merrianne be returned to her mother. There was absolutely NO reason for her to be forced into a stranger's home and culture. It was done specifically to punish her parents for not cooperating.
betty there's no analogy between a cop pulling one over and demanding to see one's drivers license and a mom being pulled over on the side of a sidewalk in her own neighborhood or backyard and demanded to see her kids birth certificates.
NO COMPARISON.
(unless you think child-bearing is a strictly regulated activity like driving a car. You aren't a democrat are you?)
marrie, they're not *your* children. Get over it.
I know they look cute on TV, and you want them to be safe, and you've heard so many bad stories about the people with whom they live. But they belong to their parents. I know that's a real difficult concept for you to grasp. But just try to see this through a parent's eyes. Put yourself in the parents' place. Just for a few seconds.
Then go back to your cocktails with the Ms. Voss and Janet Reno types, all the barren, liberal sticklers, who think they always know best about parenting, albeit only having been schooled in the abstract conerning such things.
Speaking of Ad Litems, did Debra Brown/ Children's Advocacy Center provide any? Could explain the discrepency between ALs.
Debra Brown, executive director of the Children’s Advocacy Center in Tom Green County, said that in a year her agency typically works with 271 children from a 10-county area. The advocacy center, which employs 10 full-time staff and 40 volunteers, provides guardian adlitems for children in state custody.
Voss is on the Board of Directors AND the Advisory Board of CAC: http://www.cactomgreen.org/page.php?kei=26
“This is a first for us,” she said.
Brown said her staff is reviewing books “related to their religion” so they can better understand the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. She did not specify what those books are, but just two books by ex-members of the faith are publicly available. [Gee, can we guess?] Best-selling author Jon Krakauer also wrote about the sect in his book on fundamentalist Mormonism.
Brown said Child Protection Services plans to do one-on-one interviews with the children so that 51st District Judge Barbara Walther can make decisions about what to do with them. No petitions have yet been filed in court, Brown said, though a CPS spokeswoman said the judge has ordered that 18 girls be taken into legal state custody.
Brown agreed that the experience of being removed from home is traumatic for children, but “I think it is in their best interest.
“When children live in a pretty secluded environment it is difficult to get them to open up,” she said. “If you give them a little space you are more likely to get them to open up to you.”
She described the FLDS children the same way other state emloyees have: Very quiet, respectful, well behaved.
~~
Did a quick search and indeed:
"Brown is with a local child advocacy group representing the children in legal proceedings."
http://www.rickross.com/reference/polygamy/polygamy795.html
"The guardian ad litems are willing to waive a conflict with the understanding that if problems arise, they will be addressed," said Debra Brown, the court-appointed Special Advocate in the case. "We will ask attorneys not to represent mothers and their children or adults and their sister wives in one family unit."
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4188/is_/ai_n25448235
Ummm, this is a good one:
"The relationship between me and Teresa has never been as bad as the public thinks," Malonis said Friday. "We talk to each other every day."
A hearing on the request - filed by Malonis, who said she wants to get a ruling on the matter - was scheduled for Monday but has since been postponed.
The report's purpose is to give Walther a recommendation ahead of that proceeding, said Debra Brown, director of the Tom Green County Children's Advocacy Center, which runs the district court's CASA program.
"We just feel that she's been represented well by the attorney that's been appointed for her," Brown said. "She's got an attorney that's fighting for her."
"The report is consistent with our investigation," said CPS spokesman Patrick Crimmins, "and with the position we have taken in this case since the very beginning."
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2047818/posts?page=76
Also read she was appointed AL for "all" the children but can't find a link to substantiate that.
Ztg,
I have No idea if angie voss is married or has children, do you?
She is 36, how do you know she isnt married with 4 or 5 kids?
This is how I know. She's too occupied. Being the glue between the supposedly neutral CASA and the pseudo child-police department AKA the CPS, takes all of Angie Voss' time, no doubt.
Ztg,
Thats ridiculus excuse. Many women hold demanding jobs, and take care of their children and home life at the same time.
Many women hold positions on Boards also.
You cant judge her by that. lol
How do we know Angie Voss isn't married or has children? If she is married, it's to another woman. She's a lesbian, and that relationship doesn't produce children.
Notice it takes that type of person to feel good about ripping children away from their mothers. They can't even relate to a mother's feelings, let alone a child's.
In a ruling that could have widespread impact on the ongoing legal war involving the Fundamentalist LDS Church, the judge overseeing the polygamous sect's real-estate arm has ousted the law firm that used to represent it.
Rod Parker and the Salt Lake law firm Snow Christensen & Martineau were disqualified Wednesday from representing the FLDS Church and some of its members in a challenge to the reforms of the United Effort Plan Trust.
Desert News
ME
HAHAHAHHAAH,, prove to me she is a lesbian!
The Judge ordered Parker law firm to hand over ALL documents concerning Flds.
Why am I not surprised, another Judge Walther, this time it's Lindberg. What a happy coincidence for her court and pet fiduciary Wisan, that they no longer have to entertain the fact that Wisan's entire 8 million dollar lawsuit was a fraud, as spelled out in Parker's suit. If any one would know the facts it's Parker. Instead of answering the charges, they just move to get rid of him.
Coincidentally another Judge prior Lindberg's involvement recused himself from the case. Lindberg is in over her head, and asking for trouble eventually possibly in Federal court for going along with the egregious, fraudulent, illegal actions of Fischer, Wisan, Carolyn, Walls' attorney entourage, the AGs, and basically the whole lynch mob out to destroy the FLDS and take their land.
Marie,
You have no idea do you? I am not joking in the least. I KNOW Angie is a lesbian. I happen to live in the San Angelo area, and have met her personally, as well as those around her. Go ahead and ask her. She won't deny it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fftulr-eC2U&feature=related
A citizen happened to catch on video one of the FLDS children being loaded into an ambulance at the 'lovely' "Kid's Harbor", where the children were four times more likely to be injured or killed than in their own homes.
It's all about the children my arse.
Lindberg wanted to know why the FLDS wouldn't participate in court proceedings for years, despite her repeated pleas. It was a question lawyers for the FLDS could not exactly answer.
"This is a little bit too little, too late," she said.
********
The trust was taken over in 2005, so where were Flds then to challenge this????
Who can doubt that the so called women's rights movement is the destruction of our nation? Look who's in power? Judges Barbara Walthers and Denise Lindburg. Angie Voss and the like.
I'm sure grateful we have a Man in charge who sees all.
me,
I sure wouldn't blame it all on women, Judge Jenkins was a man, as is Wisan (at least in gender)
But you gals sure could use better reps for how to be a good judge. I'd like to think it was possible, but I am losing hope.
Oh, now here's an interesting analogy:
As an ABC News analysis points out, the DFPS legal strategy is to treat the people living in the YFZ enclave as a single household. In this fashion, under what the Texas government is pleased to call the "law," finding a single case of abuse within the community would be enough to justify keeping all of the children in permanent state custody.
Which means, of course, that they would become the property of a single collectivist "household." We could envision it as sort of a polygamous union between various foster homes and the state government, in its role as Parens Patriae. And in that collectivist household, abuse is widespread, frequently lethal, and protected by "law."
http://www.truthnews.us/?p=2170
So very apropos.
And another tidbit on pre-planning:
I would urge all parents to work out a plan with your child(ren) in the event of an unwanted intrusion by the State. Work out details of how your child(ren) will contact you, such as a prepaid cell phone, teaching the child(ren) how to make a collect phone call (to a prepaid cell phone), relaying their wherabouts to you, and lastly arranging that all important rendezvous in the dead of night. Since the State could not care less about the safety or well being of your child(ren), they will simply assume that the child has run away and there is nothing that they can do about it. Of course, they will never tell you and will hope that you will never contact them in regards to your child(ren). If, by some stretch of the imagination, the State does contact you, you can always say, “How should I know, I thought you had them.” My scenario is oversimplified, and there are many additional details to consider, but I suppose it all depends on whether or not you can sleep at night knowing that your kid(s) are in some hell hole with no shortage of sex offenders or drug addicts nearby.
What does it say about CPS that citizens have to even think this way?
One argument for Voss being a lesbian, if it matters, is that she exhibits the typical/ sterotypical fear of men.
Marrie
"Kdp
Since when is Flds a church?"
Marrie again
"...from representing the FLDS Church"
Who can doubt that the so called women's rights movement is the destruction of our nation? Look who's in power? Judges Barbara Walthers and Denise Lindburg. Angie Voss and the like.
I'm sure grateful we have a Man in charge who sees all.
---------
So what do you make of Senator Reid? Is he a woman in men's clothing?
Ztgstmv,People often commit Hasty Generalizations because of bias or prejudice.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/biased-sample.html
Inductive fallacies
Hasty generalization is the fallacy of examining just one or very few examples or studying a single case, and generalizing that to be representative of the whole class of objects or phenomena.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
Hint-liberal, democrats
Sorry, Ztgstmv but I find your fallacies offensive.
1.I am a lifelong Democrat.
2.I am a lifelong feminist.
3.I have many good friends from the gay, lesbian, and transgender community.
4.I have many good friends, and many loved family members, of all colors and ethnic backgrounds.
5.I am an agnostic. I believe that on the day I die, I will find out who was right, and who was wrong. And if there is a God, that god is a loving god and will judge me based on how I have lived my life. And I am "okay" with that.
6. I am terribly intolerant of stupidity. Perhaps that is wrong. I acknowledge that possibility, and I do try to bite my tongue and let even stupid people have their say.
7. I am terribly intolerant of hate mongering and bigotry. I make no attempt at tolerating those behaviors. They have no acceptable place in a society of intelligent beings. They are not logical outcomes of intelligent thought.
8. I have two guiding tenets in my life;
More is expected from those to whom more is given, and;
Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.
9. I believe it is imperative that when one recognizes a wrong, it is your responsibility to do whatever you are able to right that wrong. To not do so is to condone the wrong.
I come on these blogs to try and 'right a wrong'. To contribute what I am able, to help others see things a bit differently. I find myself part of a group of partners in this effort, many of whom are the kinds of people I try very hard to avoid. I find the world view of some of my "colleagues" here despicable. I am finding that their thinking and perceptions are every bit as bigoted and meanspirited as any of the persons who are the perpetrators against the FLDS.
For me, this has become a real test of my ability to rise above the trials of consorting with 'the enemy', because bigots of all persuasions are 'the enemy', as far as I am concerned, and I continue to try to do what is right for a people I truly believe have been grossly wronged.
I find I am failing that test. As much as I rail against the ugly, lying assertions, and fundamentally wrong thinking of people like laurie and betty and marrie, I am equally disgusted by the thinking and ideas of people like ztgstmv.
I cannot mandate that people leave behind their crazy thinking on subjects completely irrelevant to the issues related to the problems the FLDS are having. I cannot mandate that defenders and apologists for the FLDS leave their politics and bigotries at the door because they serve no purpose othe than to fracture us from within. All I can do is recognize these fallibilities and choose whether I want to continue to associate with ascribers to these beliefs and behaviors.
I am going to take some time for myself to make that decision. I hope some of you take the time, as well. Take the time to think through how damaging it is to our cause, your cause, to bring your personal agendas that are full of hate and discrimination into this forum. Think about whether you can speak one way and model another...model the same kind of ugliness you accuse the perpetrators of modeling.....
Rericson,
1. Im not a republican or democrat. I vote for the person regardless of party.
2.Im NOT a feminist. I happen to like being a girly girl and I dont have to burn my bra, or make HUGE wild statements trying to force other to think the way I do.
3. I to have some gay friends, who are very special, and have known them before they came "out of the closet" and Yes, I know what pain they went through being afraid to let others know they were gay.
4. I AM a childrens rights protector against any sort of abuse. Actually, my husband and I both are children's rights protectors.
5. I dont hold any kind of "job" with any government entity, but we do help in childrens shelters. I agree that NOT all children in child abuse investigations should be taken away from parents.
6. But I do beleive is CPS or a shelter gets a call from a child about being abused, Cps should investigate. If a teacher, or health care professional suspects abuse, It should be reported and investigated.
7. I have never hated people, but that doesnt mean I cant hate actions when children are concerned.
8. I dont belong to any religion or denomination, but I do beleive in God. I do beleive in scripture.
9. What you see as UGLY rericson, you see it because others dont agree with you, or change their way of thinking.
10. We are all individuals, with our own opinions and insight. They dont have to match yours, or agree with you.
11. I would be willing to say that everyone who posts here, gives back to their community in some way, You certainly arent alone in doing for others.
12. We, including myself have all failed at one time or the other. But the way I see it, the children are our future contributors to make the world a better place.
13. You freely call people "Stupid"
bigoted, racists, etc. All you know by what people post are thier words, you have NO idea what color or background any of these people come from, other than the ones you personally know.
14. And whether you agree or not, Children should be everyones business! Especially those who are abused! There are lots of wonderful children who have caring loving parents, who would sacrifice themselves for their child.
15. But there are many others, whose parents are incapable of raising their children without abusing them mentally, verbelly, sexually, physically.
16. As far as Judges, or any other LE, there are both men and women. All of them follow the law. Whether they are a good or bad lawmaker, I still respect the law.
There are good ones and bad ones, just like there are good and bad construction workers, teachers, etc. It has nothing to do with gender.
Marrie, do you agree with the CPS' kidnapping of 462 children and adults who looked like children?
Yes or no?
Do you agree with CPS and Judge Judy kidnapping Merrianne again, and holding her incommunicado indefinitely, putting her through a regimen of "therapy" and brainwashing?
Yes or no?
Ztg,
That decision wasnt made by me. It was made by the evidence they saw at the time.
Its very easy for ALL of us to speculate after the fact, but none of us was there, none of us saw what authorities saw, or heard any of the answers or questions asked.
YES, I do think it was right for Merrianne to be put in another place. Ill give you my reason, but you wont like it.
Her mother and father, married her at 12yrs old to a 50yr old man in 2006. Even if the law hadnt been changed,,, 12yrs old would of been against the law in 2004.
Warren Jeffs wasnt captured till 2007, we dont have any idea if he had sex with Merrianne, but the point is, Barbara Jessop refused to "keep her daughter" away from those who have indictments against them.
See it is not exclusively the femifascists who can't tell the difference between "abuse" and "pregnancy" or even "marriage" Those who support the Police State are not all feminists. Like marrie, they think that a "simple" Armed invasion that is a mistake is no different than a construction worker who digs a whole in the wrong place.
And marrie is completely wrong about when Warren Jeffs was arrested. Try again, we'll continue to be patient. Find the dates and match them up to the calendar.
Ziggy & txblogger,
Whether or not it is legal to refuse to speak with CPS is one thing; whether it is wise is something else again. And that has nothing to do with how I vote. I've never had to interact with CPS, but I know people who have. Invariably, co-operating without offering unnecessary information is the best way to get them out of your life and get on your way.
Have you ever heard of 'self fulfilling prophecy'? If you interact with figures of authority as if you are under attack and extremely distrustful, you are apt to draw attack and distrust to you. Simple human interaction. "I fought the law and the law won!"
So according to betty, LE are like attack dogs. If you show fear, they will attack you...so don't show any fear.
So comforting to know that our government authorities are like attack dogs. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
Marrie, I take it your answer than is yes to both questions. Your answering yes to the second question, reveals your basic philosophy about child law enforcement: when in doubt, remove.
In other words, guilty until proven innocent, is how it works in the Family Law industry.
Again, makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. It's a great day to be a parent in America...surrounded by government attacks dogs. Aren't you ol' biddies proud of the attack dog socialist government you helped set up?
By the way ztg,Judge Barbara Walther is a republican.
content.usatoday.com/community/utils/idmap/29008791.story
Angie Voss is also a republican.
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/politics/entries/2008/06/27/commissioner_who_oversees_cps.html
All these crusaders are going after the wrong people. They're going for the easy targets: sitting duck fundamentalist mormons. What they should be doing is spending time on the street rescuing real victims who are being kidnapped and savagely enslaved right here in this country. There are hundreds of thousands of these sex slaves:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27098993
Start going after the real victims. Stop wasting your time on the religious people and their culture, whose children you kidnap and put through the same horrors you purport to rescue them from.
Republicans are just as liberal as democrats. They're all the same.
Attention Brooke, Marie, and all interested:
By what "due process of law" can a whole peaceful township be raided and jailed without benefit of counsel or justice?
Decent people are beginning to wonder why the Governor did not investigate this township and their religion before striking such a blow to liberty and justice. Why are officials so willing (it has always been thus, we Mormons should know) to gather evidence and raid on the affidavits of prejudiced and immoral individuals, rather than an open investigation?
Citizens of the United States and the States of Utah,Arizona, Nevada, and Texas, this is your fight! The authorities of these states have humiliated the Constitution of the United States in an effort to wipe out a religious belief they know nothing of. If the people are willing to condone such an act against those believing in the righteousness of Mormon Plural Marriage--tomorrow it will be someone else's peculiar religion, until men can no longer sit back in comfort with a sense of security, for there will always be the black clouds of doubt hanging low over the sacred homes of all Americans.
Now is the time for the free press to exert itself! for free speech to wax eloquent! for all true lovers of Christ to come forward and condemn such a cowardly act of grown men bristling with artillery chasing innocent and helpless women through the wilds of Schleicher county in an effort to kidnap them from their husbands and fathers!
The people of this country can not afford to let this action go unchallenged. The citizens of YFZ ranch have been open and above board in their dealings with the State of Texas. The State has countenanced and blessed their religious modes for years (at least by failure to act against them). Whatever may be our feelings regarding Mormon plural marriage, this portion of their religion is now dwarfed in the awful conspiracy perpetrated against them. The greater and more far-reaching principles involved should receive the focus of our attention and thoughts. It would not be right for freedom loving America to settle back in a state of neutrality when so many of her citizens are suffering drivings and persecution.
At this writing mothers and children have been forced from the association of father and husband. This, mind you, has all been done, before anyone has been tried or proven guilty of any crime. The mothers are lonesome and the children fretful, for they are in the houses of strangers hundreds of miles from their own peaceful homes. By what stretch of imagination does this 20th Century Boggs suppose that she can guarantee the happiness and peace of the mothers and children, for the rest of their lives? Does she think that by forcing a spiritual divorce upon them, and commending to the custody of the State all their children until they reach their majority, or until the mothers desert their religious belief to pay homage to the gods of Baal, happiness and peace will be brought to these broken families? By what law of justice can women and children be used as a lever to prosecute their husbands and fathers! Where else (except in Russia) are people asked to give up their religion or suffer death!
We feel it is right to ask that the leaders who have perpetrated this fraud upon the innocent village of YFZ Ranch, should be impeached, and full redress given to the wronged inhabitants. We believe the American people are not worthy of the rights they enjoy if they now sit idly by and let the Governor of Texas use "POLICE STATE METHODS" to exterminate the identity of a people, without, at least, offering a solemn protest. We appeal to the legal profession of these states and the nation to stop this high handed procedure, in order to safe-guard its dignity and justice.
Can the history of the YFZ inquisition be written? Perhaps someday, when fearless men are no longer shackled with the chains of custom and tradition. When it is written, unless redress is speedily forth-coming, its flaming pages will cause the HEART OF THIS NATION TO ACHE WITH PITY AND REMORSE!
Adapted from this quote:
http://www.fldstruth.org/sysmenu.php?MParent=HISTORY&MIndex=138
z,
We know that the government doesn't give a whit about "victims" in general.
Their focus on FLDS is motivated by fear.
Since 2005 there have been 4 attacks on religious groups in Texas, that I'm aware of, could be more.
Christ of the Hills Monastery
FLDS
Barsana Dham
House of Yehweh
COH and BD both include alleged illegal sexual activity going back to 93-96. FLDS and HOY involve poligamy.
There's a bigger plan that hasn't been divulged or uncovered.
Republicans are just as liberal as democrats. They're all the same.-Z
--------
It seems that I am having difficulty understanding your definition of liberal.
It would help if you could pick out the definition that I could relate too.
lib·er·al /ˈlɪbərəl, ˈlɪbrəl/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[lib-er-uhl, lib-ruhl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective 1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
9. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor.
10. given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation.
11. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
12. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts.
13. of, pertaining to, or befitting a freeman.
-----------
I see nothing I consider "liberal" regarding the FDLS invasion.
When focusing on something you don't want only brings about more of the same. I see absolutely nothing liberal or progressive about what has taken place.
Does anyone really think by forcing Marriane in a foster home it is going to change her beliefs? Truthfully, this is only going to strengthen her beliefs. This is not progressive in any way, shape or form. It is regressive which is just the opposite of "liberal".
Traumatizing all those children was a regressive move not a progressive move.
For the life of me I can't relate to your definition of this being "liberal".
"At this writing mothers and children have been forced from the association of father and husband. This, mind you, has all been done, before anyone has been tried or proven guilty of any crime."-me
No kidding....what the what here? Totally and I mean totally unconstitutional!
Quotes About Fascism
“The history of mankind is a history of the subjugation and exploitation of a great majority of people by an elite few by what has been appropriately termed the 'ruling class'. The ruling class has many manifestations. It can take the form of a religious orthodoxy, a monarchy, a dictatorship of the
proletariat, outright Fascism, or, in the case of the United States, corporate statism. In each instance the ruling class relies on academics, scholars and 'experts' to legitimize and provide moral authority for its hegemony over the masses.”
- Ed Crane
http://www.fdrs.org/quotes_about_fascism.html
There is a hell of a difference between fascism and liberalism.
This whole ordeal wreaks of fascim. No one has been liberated here.......people wake up!
You are correct Z....fascism goes across the boards and the only people that are being divided is US!
A House divided against itself cannot stand!
That is my view of what I see happening here in ALL respects.
The piece of paper Texas, Utah, and Arizona use to wipe their nose:
BILL OF RIGHTS.
ARTICLE I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
ARTICLE II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
ARTICLE III
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
ARTICLE IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
ARTICLE V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor to be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.
ARTICLE VI
In all criminal prosecution, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
ARTICLE VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
ARTICLE VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
ARTICLE IX
The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
ARTICLE X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people
Okay Pliggy August 29, 2006 Jeffs was arrested. But he was marrying underage girls in July 2006.
ME
YFZ is a ranch, NOT a township, not a town, was never designated as such. They werent arrested, and the mothers were allowed to go with the children.
As far as religious beleifs, I have no problem as long as "practice" doesnt break the law of a state, or Federal law.
If my religious belief said I could steal your car, I could beleive that all day long, but the minute I steal your car, Im going to be arrested.
How can you consider breaking the law of marrying underage children and having more than one legal wife, righteous?
ME
Your absolutely right, Government Cant establish a government "religion"
That doesnt mean that when a religion breaks the law of the land, it cant be prosecuted.
I have nothing against "law" unless law violates religious "practice", "practice" that hurts NO ONE except the "feelings" of bigots.
A Ceremony two weeks before he is railroaded only proves one thing, and that is that God knew what He was doing, and despite all your efforts, His will was done, and Marrianne will be happier for it forever, no matter how much Nazi's torture her now.
The FLDS believe in marrying more wives than one, and in maintaining them and their children. Is this contrary to the laws of nature? We answer, no! For wherever a man is found in his natural state he is a pluralist. From this practice no evil can result; it promotes life and does not destroy it. No loathsome disease follows legitimate marriage. The world confounds promiscuity and plural marriage, and speak of them as being the same: but not so! Promiscuity, being opposed to natural laws, curtails offspring, brings diseases of the most loathsome kind; blights, destroys, and drags down to an untimely death its votaries.
Upon every hand we can see the frightful effects of man's perverse course in breaking nature's laws. From legitimate marriage, whether to one or more wives, none of the frightful evils resulting from promiscuity have ever been manifested in any degree. Blessings have followed marriage, cursings promiscuity.
The foster home merriane is in is respecting her beliefs. No one expects her to change her beleifs.
Pliggy it wasnt just one marriage, and Warren wasnt railroaded, he could of stood up like a man, when he was supeonaed by the state of UTAH.
But, as a coward , he ran, for 2 yrs.
All the prophets in the Bible never ran, they stood strong, even if it meant going to prison, or death.
The difference between Jeffs and biblical prophets, the biblical prophets, never took from the people, they did God's work on faith, and kindness of others. Not for MONEY, LAND or Personal greed
ME
Which men supports all their wives and children?
According to Utah Arizona, the Flds in those two states were getting welfare and food stamps.
My goodness, God created ONE woman for Adam, not 10.
And yes, God said go forth and be fruitful and multiply, but NEVER mentioned multiple wives.
That was man's doing. And the leaders God chose also did it in the Old testament, and suffered greatly for doing it.
Marie,
Your arguments are disgusting and without logic. There must be law to maintain order. That law that infringes upon others rights is unconstitutional. To steal somebody's car is infringing another's rights. To marry more than one wife only brings blessings to those who CHOOSE to do so. Force is not a part of FLDS culture, though the government and people like you (anti FLDS crusaders)would love to prove that it is.
Now answer me honestly: How can anyone force someone to get married?
If you can answer that question logically, you'll be the first one I have ever witnessed. The very thought defies logic. In marriage it is either "I do" or "I don't".
Marie.
Deity has written upon plural marriage, honor, power and glory, in the coming forth of His Son Jesus through the lineage of David. There are also Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, whom God has honored to be the fathers of many nations today, including the US. And don't forget Solomon and Moses and many others.
So much for your Bible theory.
Also the word "Eve" means "many" if you look at the word's origin.
Marrie,
Yes, if he had only subjected himself to being railroaded two years earlier... duh that would have made everything all better. He would have been free, and Marrianne could have waited until she was "of age" before the sealing, and no one would have had any problems with him today.
I think you are drunk on bigot juice.
Just what kind of a country are we living in? It makes one wonder when he can pick up the paper and read that court is being held to decide which children will be left with their mothers, and which ones will be placed in foster homes!
Because these FLDS mothers believe in a religion which is not publicly accepted, does that make them mothers who love their children any less than mothers of some other religions? And are the children of a different breed, that they don't love their mothers, fathers, and brothers and sisters? Are they of a different makeup, that they won't be heartbroken and lost when they are torn from their family and all that is near and dear to them? Will they be any happier than your child or mine would be, away from the people that they love?
This would not be quite so shocking if we were living in Russia, where it is commonplace to uproot children from their mothers; but must we remind ourselves that this is America, where we have freedom of religion--where children have security and need not fear being taken from their own people?
No matter what one's opinion of these people is, it is still nothing short of disgraceful to have these mothers before a court that will decide if they can keep two of the children, or just one, or maybe none! A mother's love is just as strong whether she be a United Effort mother, a Mormon mother, a Catholic mother, or a Russian mother. And this is America!
marrie said...
The foster home merriane is in is respecting her beliefs. No one expects her to change her beleifs.
---------
How do you think she feels about the people who forced from her home? Do you feel that she now "trusts" authority?
Do you think the authority's actions have encouraged other women who may be in a abusive polygamous relationship to seek help from the authority's? How has this resolved the situation Marrie?
How have these actions helped mother's and children in abusive relationships Marrie?
Do you honestly think women will go to the authority after this experience.
You tell me girl how has the helped?
I can tell you right now that they would rather hide and suffer than to inflict this kind of pain upon their families.
Ruby,
A better question would be, do you think they would have taken Marrianne if it wasn't for her religion? ABSOLUTELY NOT!
This has nothing to do with sexual abuse of anyone, nor abuse of any kind. Marrianne is a virgin.
Marrying a child underage is infringing on that childs constitutional rights!
A Twelve year old in Texas doesnt have the right to consent to marriage or sex ME.
They arent Legal age to do either.
How? Because the parents teach them their goal in life is only marriage and having babies.
Because, They know saying no, can cause retributions against their parents if they say NO.
Ruby
The girls didnt go to authorities BEFORE this happened. ARe you kidding me?
Start counting all the girls, and some mothers who ran from Flds. No they didnt go report abuse, they some went to other family members outside Flds.
Women who had underage girls, were sneaking their daughters off telling their husbands, they were taking a trip. Some mother returned without their daughters. Some mother and children are still in hiding.
I will tell you Marrie, what those women think. They don't trust the authority. They will continue to hide their relationships. They will find another way of making their relationships unknown. This ordeal only perpetuates more of the same behavior that has occured in the past. It has resolved absolutely nothing. It has only caused a great deal pain and loss for men, women and children.
If a girl trusted the authority perpetrators could be detained as in manogamous marriages.
But that would be too simple now wouldn't it?
Now who has made gain as a result of these actions Marrie? Who profitted?
No Ruby it wouldnt! There is to much fear taught in this group! Fear of not doing what they are told. Fear of thier parents being kicked out of Flds. Fear and Guilt, if they were to say No, Their parents would suffer because of it.
Teach them correct principle and they govern themselves. That is true freedom. There is always a result for the wrong choice. People who cheat will reap the results. Women who marry cheating men will eventually be divorced and visa versa. That is the freedom FLDS women have, that very few others in the US do, an honorable and upright husband who will care for them and their offspring. Or they have the CHOICE to leave like Flora and Carolyn, the marvelous 2 who 'ESCAPED" from the FLDS out of the 1000's who love their lifestyle. Somehow the #'s don't add up.
Teaching children correct principle, and the results for wrong choices is love for that child.
Marrie, if you really love your children, teach them that if they jump off a cliff, they'll die at the bottom.
Marie,
You are so funny!
You said:
"Marrying a child underage is infringing on that childs constitutional RIGHTS!
A Twelve year old in Texas DOESN'T HAVE THE RIGHT to consent to marriage or sex ME.
They arent Legal age to do either."
Who took away their RIGHT to get married?
Can you see the oxymoron you just told?
ME
Tell your flowery story to children in your faith, that wake up and thier father who loved them and worked hard to support them is GONE because a MAN told him he had to leave! And the stupid man left his family, only to have his wife married to another man.
Polygamy isnt special, its derogatory to anyone who practices it. Its demeaning to Women and Child and yes even Men. A real man wouldnt leave his family behind. FLDS are married to ONE man, their prophet.
If it were just ONE or TWo people who left flds, I might agree it was just a person with a grudge. But their have been WAY to many, men and women, and they all basically say the same thing.
You can think whatever you chose about me, ME! I dont answer to MEN. The only true authority is God.
"The right to have children and
the right to raise children is a
fundamental liberty. The Supreme
Court has ruled that that liberty
is akin to freedom of speech and
freedom of thought, it can only be
interfered with by the government
if the government makes a particularized showing to a judge that the children were in danger of imminent harm. But, mass sweeping arrests of children and
interrogations of them without their parents present, is not only
unlawful, it's criminal."
- Judge Andrew Napolitano
ruby, "liberal" as in gay Voss liberal.
Marie,
Another oxymoron.
"You can think whatever you chose about me, ME! I dont answer to MEN. The only true authority is God."
God is a MAN.
ARTICLE VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
-------------------
I'd like to get an interpretation from the Supreme Court as to this idea that children can be kept and locked away from their parents for up to 18 months before the parents get a chance to have this punishment addressed by a jury of their peers!
The sanctity of home, the liberty of person, the modesty of maidenhood, have all been wantonly violated in the effort to punish the Latter-day Saints (FLDS) for their integrity to God and His laws. Instead of seeking to establish justice and insure domestic tranquility, they have sought to array neighbor against neighbor, friend against friend, brother against brother, wife against husband and children against parents, and to loosen and destroy all the bonds which bind man to his fellow-man. Their mission has not been to build up and cement society, but to tear down and break it up. They have taken delight in their efforts to sow dissension and strife, to tempt wives to betray their husbands and to induce husbands, by threats of severe punishment if they refused to comply with their wishes, to disown and forsake their wives, and to discard and bastardize their offspring, and to turn loose as forlorn outcasts those whom they had solemnly covenanted to provide for and protect. When these officials commenced their attack upon us and our religion they found our homes filled with love and affection—husbands and fathers devoted to their wives and children, and doing all in their power to make them comfortable and happy; wives and mothers contented and at peace, honoring their husbands and proud of their relationship to them; and children whose respect and obedience testified to the reverence and esteem in which they held their parents. Husbands and wives and children dwelt together without compulsion or coercion. Nowhere on all this broad earth, where matrimonial ties are held to have binding effect, did such complete liberty exist as among the Latter-day Saints (FLDS). It is true, wives were sealed to husbands by the eternal Priesthood of the Almighty, for time and all eternity; but this union in the first place was only made possible by love, and by love the tie is perpetuated. Women knew their rights, and they knew that they could not be compelled to live with an unworthy man. Happiness reigned in our homes, because freedom reigned there, and all had their full agency. No better proof of this need be adduced than the fact that in the midst of all this persecution, and the many inducements there are offered to women to dissolve their family relationships, but few men have accepted the proffered terms and discarded their wives; and to the honor of our sisters be it said, not one woman that we know of up to the present writing has broken her marriage vow and dissolved her relations with her husband and children.
Quote from John Taylor.
marrie,
You are just plain dumb and narrow. It's women like you who give the female gender a bad rap.
You say you only care about the children, yet you would have them taken into foster care where they are 4 times more likely to be injured or killed than in their own homes.
Your mantra is "obey the law", yet it's perfectly fine with you if LE/ CPS violate the law/ constitution because it suits you- a justifiable means to an end.
goofy marrie says:
"Start counting all the girls, and some mothers who ran from Flds. No they didnt go report abuse, they some went to other family members outside Flds.
"Women who had underage girls, were sneaking their daughters off telling their husbands, they were taking a trip. Some mother returned without their daughters. Some mother and children are still in hiding."
HA HA HA HA HA HA!!
You are something else, you really believe that? That is so dumb I didn't think someone would really believe that...is that really what you believe? ha ha ha ha... O, my gut hurts.
ME said:
"God is a MAN."
I always knew that conservatives were really just talking about themselves when they labelled liberals 'secular humanists'.
Well they don't pray to "FATHER in heaven" for nothin
Psychiatrist Stands Against Break
up Of Polygamy Cult
Tucson (AP)—A social psychiatrist found fault yesterday with Arizona's plan for breaking up the polygamous colony of Short Creek.
Dr. Henry Schumacher, of the U. S. Public Health Service, stated in an interview that "it is a terrible and tragic mistake to break up any family."
"Family life is the basic underpinning of this nation," he said. . . . "Any child needs the loving care of its mother. The father is extremely important. Just as important to the mother as to the child."
That psychiatrist should have said that to Warren Jeffs the nonprophet profit. How many homes did he break up and how many fathers did he send away?
Women knew their rights, and they knew that they could not be compelled to live with an unworthy man.
"It really was, and continues to be, the goal of Texas to drive the FLDS out of their state...."
I signed up just to ask this question. Rerison, on what authority do you make this statement? Perhaps the goal of Texas is that those who live in Texas obey the law? Perhaps the goal is protect young girls from having to marry old men?
You do not live in Texas and thus you have no right or authority to state what Texas' goals are.
Also you stated that it is clear that LE knew from the start that everything was a hoax.
Again on what authority do you make such slanderous statements. Were you there? Do you have inside information?
Please stick to your opinions and stop stating them as if they were facts when in truth they are figments of your imagination.
Why don't you come over to the Trib threads and debate with adults instead of the FLDS sheeple.
Me--do you deny that women are punished if they defy the prophet?
Do you deny that their children are asigned to other families and they are sent to repent in houses of hiding or Mexico?
You can't hide the truth or the sun with your finger.
It is out there for the whole world to see.
BTW, in any religion or anywhere in the US a parent who allows a 50plus man to deep kiss their twelve year old deserves to have that child taken away. That is NOT religious persecution, it is the protection of a child. Barbara allowed her daughter to be held in the arms and kissed by a grown man, that alone is abuse not to mention the video that she allowed to be spread all over internet.
Sheesh if she loved her daughter or respected her a tiny bit she would never have allowed her pain to be used for publicity. Barbara pimped out her daughter, twice.
And if in your protected FLDS world you don't know what "pimped out" means, it means she traded or sold her daughter for personal gain.
Once to the prophet for celestial favors and second for publicity and sympathy points.
pandora said (7:46 PM)
That psychiatrist should have said that to Warren Jeffs the nonprophet profit. How many homes did he break up and how many fathers did he send away?
Pandora Box,
You have to look at the law. According to our law, he never did break up a single home, nor separated a single family. They did that to themselves. Glad I could clarify.
Street
Hogwash and propaganda OntheStreet, I have read the testimonies of the men who were deprived of their families. Remember some of them drove miles to try to reclaim their children.
You can worship a farse and deny all you want but the truth is there for whoever wants to see.
Warren Jeffs is a charletan and farse, following right in the footsteps of Joseph Smith.
I have personally talked to someone whose family was destroyed by this evil man.
Their only sin was to deny Warren Jeffs the "privilege" of marrying their fourteen year old daughter.
Marrie,
You stated that Merrianne is in a good home where they are respecting her religion (paraphrased).
How do you know that?
Is Merrianne allowed to worship/attend a FLDS worship service? Is she allowed to have her Mormon literature? Is she allowed to eat her FLDS preferred diet of healthy, wholesome foods?
The one letter we were privy to said that her food was 'awful' and she was hungry. That doesn't sound like the foster home is going out of their way to accomodate her.
Do you have insider information? And if so, how come?
Bet you don't answer.
lol
Hogwash and propaganda OntheStreet, I have read the testimonies of the men who were deprived of their families.
How many men are we talking about?
How does that compare to the number of men who loose their families on the outside either through family court or CPS?
There continues to be an effort to present FLDS as being different than or worse than mainstream. I haven't seen that yet.
A recent case I'm aware of- dad has an affair. Mom seeks divorce. The court 're-structures' the family by granting a divorce. Mom gets sole custody.
I don't see any radical difference. Families outside are 'restructured' everyday, and many times for no good reason. And heavily weighted against fathers.
You anti-FLDS are obsessed with FLDS "obeying the law", didn't the fathers loose their families for "violating known laws" within FLDS?
The major difference I see is that the women and children's needs are met. They aren't left to fend for themselves or subsisting on welfare and medicaid in some rat-infested Section 8 housing.
Marianne was "pimped out" by CPS. Those pictures should've never been published in the media. Who leaked them?
They used those photos in an attempt to justify violating the law and to further their agenda.
PANDORA-BOX Said (8:22 PM)
Warren Jeffs is following right in the footsteps of Joseph Smith. REPLY: Yes he is. Great observation.
I have personally talked to someone whose family was destroyed by this evil man. REPLY: Yes, as "Judas was destroy by Christ", but was he?
Their only sin was to deny Warren Jeffs the "privilege" of marrying their fourteen year old daughter. REPLY: See? You confess their rebellion against God. Marriage is of God. All will agree with that, for God is the Creator of all. So all creation is His right to direct, and all who were cast out were within the FLDS acknowledging Warren Jeffs as God's spokesman, UNTIL they got caught in immorality and rebellion, Judas like. Then, who destroyed who?
The answer, my friend...
"It really was, and continues to be, the goal of Texas to drive the FLDS out of their state...."
Perry is a member of the Bilderberg Group.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90jfQrb4wAE
If you don't know who they are, do a little research.
"Texans have made a decision about marriage and if there is some other state that has a more lenient view than Texas then maybe that's a better place for them to live," Perry
“I wanted to make it unappealing to them,” Hilderbran said. “I hoped they wouldn’t stay.”
Hilderbran of course, introduced the bill to change the legal age of marriage from 14 to 16. It failed miserably, so Perry attached it to another bill that passed.
"Both Hilderbran and Darby said they are planning to bring new bills targeting the FLDS residents again in the next legislative session, which begins in January."
"I'm not shy about this: We don't want Eldorado, Texas, to become the next Hildale, Utah," Hilderbran said Tuesday at the Capitol. "We're not targeting their beliefs; we're targeting their behavior so that they do want to go somewhere else. I'm not shy about it."
I was the fellow who called to find out Voss's age. CPS will NOT disclose marital status or if she has kids, though they did give out her office number. As an exercise, I compared her pictures to Ellen Degeneres, Rachel Maddow, and K.D. Lang, and the resemblence is .. well you judge. That description might also fit some of the kid's lawyers who were some good guys and some real bad apples. I could not find Texas nondiscrmination statement, but New York State CPS job announcment clearly states they do NOT discrminate in hiring on the basis of sexual orientation. With a general population within women of maybe 2-5%, the poplulation among CPS workers might be as high as 10% or higher, a topic which is remarkeable considering how much racism was written about this sect / cult, but nothing much has been raised about FLDS homophobic views which are likely far stricter than anything Sarah Palin believes in. ("I tolerate them with all my heart...) Many blogs have remarked about Voss's apparent fear of men with cameras that made her sure the place was unsafe for children within a hour of starting to interview girls from midnight into 3:30 in the morning. They were abusing girls the moment voss demanded they pull the girls out of bed to talk for 6 hours straight.
Post a Comment
<< Home